We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:
Implication | Reference |
---|---|
90 \(\Rightarrow\) 51 |
Variations of Zorn's lemma, principles of cofinality, and Hausdorff's maximal principle, Part I and II, Harper, J. 1976, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic |
51 \(\Rightarrow\) 25 |
Choice and cofinal well-ordered subsets, Morris, D.B. 1969, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. |
25 \(\Rightarrow\) 34 | clear |
34 \(\Rightarrow\) 38 | The Axiom of Choice, Jech, [1973b] |
38 \(\Rightarrow\) 108 | clear |
Here are the links and statements of the form equivalence classes referenced above:
Howard-Rubin Number | Statement |
---|---|
90: | \(LW\): Every linearly ordered set can be well ordered. Jech [1973b], p 133. |
51: | Cofinality Principle: Every linear ordering has a cofinal sub well ordering. Sierpi\'nski [1918], p 117. |
25: | \(\aleph _{\beta +1}\) is regular for all ordinals \(\beta\). |
34: | \(\aleph_{1}\) is regular. |
38: | \({\Bbb R}\) is not the union of a countable family of countable sets. |
108: | There is an ordinal \(\alpha\) such that \(2^{\aleph _{\alpha}}\) is not the union of a denumerable set of denumerable sets. |
Comment: